Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and Amazon Ordered to Enter Settlement Talks Over 'App Store' Trademark Issue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I had a guy say that he was having problems getting apps from the google store. He had a Win7 phone.
Educate us then please.
Yes, a shop in Arizona that sells panes of glass may call itself Windows Explorers. They are in non competing markets.
No, it doesn't, because Palm didn't have it first.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/155597/palm_apps_store.html
http://www.webpagefx.com/blog/internet/history-of-app-stores-infographic/
Even if they would have, it's still irrelevant, is the Palm version of the App Store still around ?
If you look up the word "application", it has many different meanings.
----------
Can you show us a company that still exists and had an "App Store" before Apple did? If you can, I'd say that Apple should not be allowed to have an "App Store".
Who is saying Apple shouldn't have an App Store? It's also irrelevant if someone else HAD or HAS an App Store now. Please do yourself (and us) a favor and read this thread. And even the other one which has been linked. Because you're not getting it. And it's been explained. Several times.
You must know an unusual group of people, then. Android phones are around 75% of what people out there are buying, with iOS coming in south of 15%.
And if people are told that they can buy their app at any app store of their choice, somehow I doubt that many of them would really think of looking for their app at the iStore.
Read the guy's message that I was replying to. It's not about that.
P.S. No, I'm not going to read all your comments here, especially since it's hard to trust anything coming from a Google fan. Face it, you ALWAYS comment in favor of Google.
LOL. Ok. Sure I do. You know this isn't about Google though, right? It's about Amazon? I guess you're keeping with the theme of irrelevance?
My group is unusual too, because here in California, "App Store" links to the iOS platform. In China and other parts of the world, it's probably a different story. You're applying worldwide data to a small area, and most areas are unusual compared to the average.
----------
Apple and Microsoft are both enemies of Google, Amazon is a friend of Google, and I'm arguing for Apple and MS. If I sensed that you are an Amazon fan, I wouldn't mention Google, but that isn't the case.
----------
Not good. Even if I believed that every one of Apple's legal cases were in the right, which I definitely don't by the way, it's better to avoid suing so much when you have so much public attention. Even when Cisco sued Huawei, a Chinese company, for directly ripping off their code (yes, actually stealing data directly form Cisco), they got terrible publicity in China.
Just reread this and wanted to comment again...
I never said you had to re-read my comments. I said re-read the thread. I'm not even the one that has explained this over and over.
Also - you're free to stay ignorant. That's your choice. But to try and put the blame on the fact that you don't trust me because I differ in opinion than you is silly in my opinion.
This thread and the other have FACTS. Not opinions.
Even if I was a die-hard Google fan (which I am not) - a fact is a fact.
/done
Its like saying.. "People will get confussed over the "Mac App Store" and "App Store" because they have the same word in their name"
No we won't, we know exactky what the differences are
Although, there may be some confussion to newbies, yu'll get used to it.
Same thing here. Maybe amazon should have added a character at the ent, or brginning, to be sure of the difference.
Just the lack of capitalisation and no space, WOULD actually confuse me, because they are spelt the same"
However, since its from Amazon's, i WOUD know where i am.
No we won't, we know exactky what the differences are
Although, there may be some confussion to newbies, yu'll get used to it.
Same thing here. Maybe amazon should have added a character at the ent, or brginning, to be sure of the difference.
Just the lack of capitalisation and no space, WOULD actually confuse me, because they are spelt the same"
However, since its from Amazon's, i WOUD know where i am.
Its like saying.. "People will get confussed over the "Mac App Store" and "App Store" because they have the same word in their name"
No we won't, we know exactky what the differences are
Although, there may be some confussion to newbies, yu'll get used to it.
Same thing here.
THAT'S why none of the apps I've downloaded from the App Store work on my iPhone or iPad. Man - I was so confuzzled. Thanks for pointing that out. This should be a sticky!
There's hardly any chance Amazon came up with the name "App Store" by themselves. There are plenty of things they could have called it. But I don't see how any user could be CONFUSED between the two, considering that each only works on its respective platform. The only confusion that could arise is if someone says to download something "from the App Store", and you don't know which App Store he is talking about.
People seem to misunderstand the use of generic term here...
Windows, Word, etc may be generic terms, but not in the IT sector. Windows OS does not affect others in the original glass pane window industry.
App Store is generic, but is also generic in the industry it is competing with. Others in the IT industry do write and sell apps, applications.
Windows Store
- A store that sells windows (glass panes)
- A store that sells software for the Windows OS
= Not competing
App Store
- A store that sells apps
- A store that sells apps for Apple OS'
= Competing
Even 23 years ago derivations of the word app were being being made.
PC magazine coined the term "Applet" as being a small app that runs in a bigger program (in this case java applets as plugins for websites) all the way back in 1990.
I as a software developer have used the term app for many many years, before I even considered Apple to be anything with a future.
In circles I walk in we usually use the term app for a program that is relatively small. A program we'd write in a few hours or a day, as opposed to a full blown software package.
I've never heard of this comparison of PC's using "programs" and Macs using "Applications". Many of us use the term as relating to scale. Phone apps being relatively small in my view therefore are logically apps.
There's no question that Amazon can use the generic term "AppStore". The real question is: Why did they choose to use unoriginal terminology that was already in use by Apple. It seems to me they would have wanted to use something more original. The list is long and easy to come up with.
1. AppStop
2. AppPLace
3. AppShop
4. AppCorner
5. AppNook
6. AppStuff
7. AppThis
I could go on and on, but the point is why not come up with something original instead of the easy and obvious?
1. AppStop
2. AppPLace
3. AppShop
4. AppCorner
5. AppNook
6. AppStuff
7. AppThis
I could go on and on, but the point is why not come up with something original instead of the easy and obvious?
Apple has every right to pursue this action.
Everyone and their mama knows that Apple coined the AppStore period.
That is their creation, and it does not even come close to the example of grocery store like someone previously mentioned.
Nobody even knew what mobile apps were before apple came up with this term and started with the app store.
I am neither an apple person or windows person. Love both period, I am universal in all usage of software and hardware.
But the AppStore is apples and it does not matter who is trying to say what.
At the end of the day it is just all semantics.
Peace
Everyone and their mama knows that Apple coined the AppStore period.
That is their creation, and it does not even come close to the example of grocery store like someone previously mentioned.
Nobody even knew what mobile apps were before apple came up with this term and started with the app store.
I am neither an apple person or windows person. Love both period, I am universal in all usage of software and hardware.
But the AppStore is apples and it does not matter who is trying to say what.
At the end of the day it is just all semantics.
Peace
Hey look we're going to rehash the other thread with everyone saying the same thing, like minds will magically be changed this time.
No, when Apple introduced the app store it wasn't generic. It was Apple's actions and the following by other companies that made it generic.
Hypothetical question:
If all car manufacturers would now start producing Segway like transporters, would you -in 10 years time when everyone would have one- also argue that the term Segway is generic? Would you argue that the original Segway business does not have a claim to it?
Why are we arguing over this when we could be launching thermonuclear war against the people who thought it would be a good idea to shorten "appetizer" to "app?" That's worth a firing squad.
Because they invented the name Kleenex.
----------
^^ This. See "Genericized Trademark".
No, being descriptive is not in itself a disqualifying factor, the term has to be both descriptive AND generic. "Navlet's Nursery" is not generic since it includes the company name (which most likely is already trademarked)
Are you saying that Apple's use of the diminutive "App" in App Store uses one of those other meanings of Application rather than the one related to computing ?
Because that reply made absolutely 0 sense.
----------
Except for SAGE Networks who filed for the same trademark in 1998 and abandonned it 6 months after it was published for opposition in November 2000.
Except for Palm who used it on their devices as shown time and again here.
So Apple didn't coin it.
Please explain how "App Store" a store that sells apps, is not close to "Grocery Store", a store that sells groceries.
Both are descriptive of the kind of store they are.
----------
Which everyone keeps bringing up, but is exactly the opposite situation as "App Store" is facing.
The claims are ridiculously broad on both. Here is the Amazon patent. The laws are independent of trademark law, but it is quite silly and showcases the ridiculousness that can show up in software patents. It reveals very little in terms of details about how this is accomplished and focuses heavily on conceptual elements in its text. I read most of it, including the entirety of the claims. Google also turned up an article suggesting it was rejected in Europe.
I don't have a problem with patents and trademarks in general, but both of these appear extremely silly. Your assessment of how this should go is even sillier, as they aren't governed by the same laws. Ideally both of these abominations will be declared invalid for different reasons.
It was generic before that. The difference is that you hadn't personally heard of it until Apple started using it, which is understandable. If you were going to apply for a trademark, there would be research involved.